The situation has become so precarious that European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Wednesday that Brussels is studying whether to halt vaccine exports to ensure that “Europe gets its fair share” – an announcement that sparked angry reactions from countries outside the European Union expecting doses. . The supply problem was exacerbated this week by a number of European governments’ decisions to ban the use of the AstraZeneca Coronavirus vaccine due to safety concerns – not only disrupting vaccine supplies but potentially causing long-term public concerns about the drug, even if it later proves to be safe, as many expect Of the experts, Germany, Italy, Spain, Ireland and France are among the countries that have suspended the use of the vaccine, which was developed with great fanfare by researchers at the University of Oxford and makes up a large part of the vaccine supply across the continent. Their concern relates to a number of blood clotting incidents, some of which are fatal, among those who received the stab, and the prevailing opinion among scientists is that these incidents are likely not related to inoculation – this association does not essentially imply causation. “Vaccines protect against one thing: infection or infection plus disease,” Susan Ellenberg, a biostatistician at the University of Pennsylvania, told Stat News this week. “They are not protecting you from anything else that might happen to you.” The European Medicines Agency (EMA), Europe’s largest drug regulator, is expected to announce the preliminary results of its safety review on Thursday, and hopefully it will provide some much-needed clarity. But the losses were already high for Europe either way, with expired doses, rising cases, and poor morale, according to a report by Michael Birnbaum, Chico Harlan and Stefano Petrelli of The Washington Post, some parts of Europe are now in the third wave of infections. “With every day that vaccination is delayed, there are hospitalizations and deaths,” said Fabrizio Brigliasco, a virologist at the University of Milan in Italy – a country that closes its doors again due to the high number of cases. In Europe, the biggest problem is not recklessness but caution. The continent was hit hard and the beginning of the epidemic. Its success in the year has varied since then across Europe, with nearly all nations – even those that followed most of the recommended measures – have suffered heavy losses, and this is where Europe’s leaders have been praised, including those whose causes and inclinations were praised. Technocrat, such as the German Angela Merkel. It has lagged behind stricter policy decisions in countries such as Britain, Israel and the United States, as well as leaner governments like Chile. These countries adopted strong arm tactics to ensure a variety of dosages, and quickly sought independent deals with manufacturers. . Meanwhile, most European countries have adhered to the EU’s more measured approach and final deals at a later date. The sticking point, according to insiders, was the price. Another wrinkle emerged later, when Europe saw mass launches of a vaccine produced by Pfizer and developed by BioNTech – a German company – taking place in the United States, Britain and Israel, prior to that. The EMA has even approved the drug, and the EMA has now approved four different vaccines. But there were major concerns among national regulators about AstraZeneca, which was initially restricted in Germany and elsewhere for use on those over the age of 65 due to data limitations for that age group. The move was reversed after studying results from England, where the vaccine is widely used, and the new concern about blood clots reflects the chaotic, cautious nature of many European authorities, who have stopped vaccinations despite both the EMA and the World Health Organization. They said they should continue during the investigation. And the motivation may not be just public health, “It was a political choice,” Nicolas Magrini, director of the Italian Medicines Agency, told La Repubblica on Monday. Leaders saw other countries pausing the drug and made the decision to do so, too, instead of listening to global public health agencies. In some ways, the situation is a product of the strengths and weaknesses of the European Union which is a bloc of 27 members, with a larger and more diverse population than the United States, as well as a larger economy. When they move in unison, they can be powerful, but their decision-making process is often impractical and unpredictable. The European Union, for example, was largely able to purchase cheaper vaccine doses from the United States by its heft – a big financial move, given the supply needed. But consensus-based decision-making has slowed the delivery of those doses, which could nullify any economic benefits, and the stark contrast stands against the startup in Britain, which was technically part of the bloc until last year. London chose to withdraw from purchasing the vaccine in Europe and instead went ahead on its own. This appears to be a bright spot for Prime Minister Boris Johnson amid Britain’s disastrous pandemic performance. Hungary has vaccinated some of its citizens with the Russian and Chinese Sputnik V vaccines, citing the need for a wider range than what the EMA agreed. Other countries are moving to follow suit, albeit slowly, but the panicked reactions to blood clot concerns, despite recommendations from the European Energy Agency to continue dosing AstraZeneca, are a reminder that the European Union is not a technocratic giant. It is made up of individual nation states that will act in their own way when they feel the need, for the time being, that might be a unique European problem. Outside Europe, many countries still actively seek AstraZeneca injection. “There are people who have concerns,” said Thai Prime Minister Prayut Chan Usha on Tuesday after receiving the first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine. But we must believe the doctors, and believe in our medical professionals.